Am I totally nuts or just a bit off?

Tonywinsc, you B&W analogy is dead brilliant !

Wolf, what does sitting nearest a speaker mean?
I have two and I sit equidistant between them and my ears look equidistant in the mirror.

From a technical standpoint stereo has nothing to do with the number of channels as long as it's more than one. Two, four or twelve channels, they are all stereo.
Most audiophiles should see the value in capturing a live performance with each instrument/section in it's own channel. The way we would hear it in a natural event. We hear in a 360 degree environment with emphasis on certain forward perspectives, but we still hear from left to right and even behind.
Yes mono can be good or even great, all things being equal stereo has at least twice the sound potential, Realistically it is an exponentially better recording platform.

Wolf_Garcia otherwise explained it perfectly from a practical standpoint.

Yes, stereo has all the advantages on paper. But its how its used recording by recording in each case that matters. Other than with the rare (these days) simple two or three microphone recording techniques what goes into the stereo mix is a product of what the production crew decides to mix in. It may or may not resemble anything like you might hear live.

Mono on the other hand takes that variable out of the equation. In certain setups in certain rooms with the right acoustics, it can sound very much like what a live performance in the same space would sound like with all the stereo mixing and mastering out of the picture. At least that has been my experience.

07-23-13: Zenblaster
Most audiophiles should see the value in capturing a live performance with each instrument/section in it's own channel.

Depends on what is being recorded, though. I would certainly disagree with that statement when it comes to classical music, for example. The very best stereo classical recordings are almost invariably those which have been recorded using a minimal number of microphones, perhaps just two or three, well placed in a good hall. And with minimal or no subsequent mixing, equalization, limiting, compression, or other processing.

Unfortunately, as Mapman indicated that sort of purist approach to recording is the exception rather than the rule these days, even when it comes to classical music.

Regards,
-- Al

" The very best stereo classical recordings are almost invariably those which have been recorded using a minimal number of microphones, perhaps just two or three, well placed in a good hall. And with minimal or no subsequent mixing, equalization, limiting, compression, or other processing."

No doubt!

Stereo rules in this case. Many early stereo classical recordings were done exactly this way in order to show of the medium's capabilities and are still hard to beat.

The mono recordings I tend to like best are from the 50s and early 60s and of smaller rock, blues and jazz ensembles. Recent digital remasters of most any mono recording on Sun, Chess or even Stax labels are outstanding.

Just the other day I was marveling at how good the original "Roll Over Beethoven" by Chuck Berry was sounding.